Justice Peter Lifu of a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Friday, rebuked Johnmary Jideobi, the plaintiff and his lawyer, Ndubuisi Ukpai, over lack of diligence to pursue the suit filed to stop former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting in the 2027 presidential election.
The judge, who described the attitude of the plaintiff and his lawyer, which had continued to stall proceedings in the case, as “unacceptable,” awarded a N1 million fine against the plaintiff in favour of the former president.
“I have carefully and painstakingly considered all the submissions and prayers of the learned counsel in this matter. As this court has earlier ruled and ordered, this case has a character of politics. I have taken judicial notice of the timetable of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
“The duty of this court is to ensure that political cases are given accelerated hearing and disposed of expeditiously. In that wise, and as earlier stated, this court reiterates the provisions of the National Judicial Policy in case management”, the court held.
Justice Lifu ordered the plaintiff, who filed the suit on October 6, 2025, and has not deemed it fit to serve, “is hereby granted grace of two hours from now, that is 10:30 am, to serve all the processes on INEC and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), who are 2nd and 3rd defendants in the suit.
“The 2nd and 3rd defendants are hereby ordered to file and serve their responses, if any, before 11am on Monday, 18th of May, 2026.
“By consent of counsel, this suit is adjourned to May 18th, 2026, by 12noon for definite hearing of the originating summons and all pending applications,” Justice Lifu held.
The judge, who observed that Jideobi filed the suit since October 6, 2025, expressed surprise that he had yet to serve INEC and the AGF, six months after.
Besides, he observed that counsel for the former president (1st defendant), Chief Chris Uche, SAN, told the court on May 8 when the case came up that they got the information about the suit in the media and decided to file and serve their processes.
The judge equally observed that on May 11, neither Jideobi, who is also a lawyer, nor Ukpai was in court despite fixing the hearing time at 2pm at the instance of the plaintiff’s lawyer on May 5.
He further noted that though Uche asked for a N5 million cost, the request was not granted in the interest of fair hearing.
“On May 11 , this court refused to grant the 1st defendant’s application for a cost of N5 million.
Today, it is crystal clear that the plaintiff did not serve the originating summons on the 2nd and 3rd defendants since October 6, 2025.
“This case is for hearing today and the hearing has been frustrated or aborted due to the tardiness of the plaintiff who is a lawyer by training and calling. Hearing cannot go on now. Consequently, I hold that punishment should lie where the fault is.
“I hereby award the cost of N1 million against the plaintiff but in favour of the 1st defendant only. I so ruled,” Justice Lifu held.
Earlier when the case was called on Friday, neither Jideobi nor Ukpai was not in court again, but counsel
to the former president, Uche, and AGF’s counsel, J. D. Esho, were in court.
Justice Lifu then asked the registrar to confirm from the court record if the plaintiff and INEC were served with hearing notices which she did.
The former president’s lawyer, therefore, applied that the case be dismissed with substantial cost due to the plaintiff’s continued absence in court.
Uche said the plaintiff and his lawyer did not see the reason to either write to the court or the defendants on why they would not be in court.
The senior lawyer said Jideobi and Ukpai, in their manner, had portrayed absolute disdain and disrespect to the court and expressed surprise that the plaintiff, who initiated the suit, dragged a former Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces of the country to court for nothing and abandoned the case.
Uche said, despite getting the news about the case in the media, the former president filed all his processses, including a preliminary objection, and served same on the plaintiff.
“The plaintiff thinks he can hold the court and other parties to ransom, and stayback in the comfort of his house and drag all of us to court,” he said and added that, there must be a consequence for every action.
“They think the courts are toothless bulldog and the dignity of the court must be protected my lord,” he said and urged the court to invoke its disciplinary power on the plaintiff and dismiss the case as being an abuse of court process.
AGF’s lawyer, Esho, who told the court that her office was served with the ex-president’s response to the suit on May 11, said they were yet to be served with the originating summons of the plaintiff.
The registrar also confirmed that, though INEC was served with hearing notice of the day’s sitting, the commission had not also been served with the plaintiff’s processes.
Midway into the case, Ukpai entered the court and apologised for his lateness.
After taking submissions of all the lawyers, the judge adjourned the matter till til May 18 for definite hearing of all pending applications and the substantive suit at 12 noon.
END
Comments